This post is a bit of inside baseball for the bibliophiles and theologues who read this blog. Yesterday, I commented on the new issue of SBJT on the book of Romans. Douglas Moo is one of the contributors and is well known as an accomplished Pauline specialist. He is especially known for his thick commentary on Romans in the NICNT series.
Anyway, Moo’s article in SBJT is about Paul’s use of the Old Testament in the book of Romans. Moo surveys some seven approaches that scholars have used to describe Paul’s use of the Old Testament. In the course of this discussion he renders a judgment on Richard Hays‘ “intertextual” approach (which I might add is all the rage right now among many NT scholars). Moo writes:
“I would at least tentatively suggest that Hays’s proposal, along with other similar intertextual methods, is influenced not a little by postmodern views of meaning and interpretation. . . Postmodernism, to the degree that I understand it, poses both opportunities and challenges to evangelical Christianity. But surely its greatest challenge is the denial that absolute truth can be discovered. And it is a this point that I am finally unsatisfied with Hays’s proposal about Paul’s interpretation of the OT. For all its strengths, it does not quite go far enough in dealing with the problem of validity.”